Abstract

ABSTRACT Previous research found that health risk messages framed to be congruent with people’s independent or interdependent self-construal were not consistently more effective than incongruent messages. We argue that people potentially process the self-construal congruent health risk messages in a biased manner. To test this proposition, we examined the role of self-affirmation, which is expected to reduce defensive processing, in college nonsmokers’ responses to an antismoking message congruent vs. incongruent with their dominant self-construals. Results from an online experiment suggested that self-affirmation moderated the self-congruency effect. Specifically, among college nonsmokers endorsing a dominant interdependent self-construal, self-congruency effect emerged only when the group was engaged in self-affirmation. Among college nonsmokers endorsing a dominant independent self-construal, with no prior affirmation, the group reported self-incongruent messages better than the self-congruent messages. After being engaged in self-affirmation, the group reported similar effects for self-congruent and self-incongruent messages. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.